For me the biggest thing that irks me isn't one specific mistake (they're/there/their or loose/lose etc.) but repeated mistakes. I can overlook any typo done once or twice, though I'll usually still notice and cringe a little on the inside. What gets me is when people make the same mistake over and over. I tried reading gocurrycracker.com a few times and had to stop because they have a chronic issue with dropping periods from the last sentence in each paragraph. Once I noticed that it was all I could see and it drove me up the effing wall.

Similarly, I have a coworker who types "defiantly" every time he means "definitely" and has been doing so for years now. Drives me nuts!

Similarly, I have a coworker who types "defiantly" every time he means "definitely" and has been doing so for years now. Drives me nuts!

I'm generally a very good speller (or I used to be before I got so lazy). But there are certain words that have always been difficult for me. I know what these words are. I know how to spell them because I've memorized them. But my brain works differently with these words and I don't have them memorized the same way other words are memorized. I have to use tricks to get the correct spelling and it slows me down a lot when typing. Definitely is one of these words. Architect is another.

Similarly, I have a coworker who types "defiantly" every time he means "definitely" and has been doing so for years now. Drives me nuts!

I have to use tricks to get the correct spelling and it slows me down a lot when typing. Definitely is one of these words.

This is one of my commonly misspelled words as well ... I memorized it by remembering "finite" in the middle of the word :-)

My third grade teacher drilled this one into our brains by emphasizing the 'finite' part too.

She was so good - I remember asking her how to spell 'beautiful'. She handed me a huge dictionary and said, 'find it'. She let me search for twenty minutes. She didn't bail me out. Whenever I said I couldn't find it, she'd just say, 'keep looking. It's in there.' At last I found it. I never forgot the spelling after that. She was AWESOME!

In South Africa, "now" doesn't mean now. It means later. Unless you say "just now", then that means much later. Just cracked me up thinking of that. The fastest you can get anything done is "now now", but that just means soon, but not right now.

In South Africa, "now" doesn't mean now. It means later. Unless you say "just now", then that means much later. Just cracked me up thinking of that. The fastest you can get anything done is "now now", but that just means soon, but not right now.

For me the biggest thing that irks me isn't one specific mistake (they're/there/their or loose/lose etc.) but repeated mistakes. I can overlook any typo done once or twice, though I'll usually still notice and cringe a little on the inside. What gets me is when people make the same mistake over and over. I tried reading gocurrycracker.com a few times and had to stop because they have a chronic issue with dropping periods from the last sentence in each paragraph. Once I noticed that it was all I could see and it drove me up the effing wall.

Oh, God, I thought that was just me. I can read GCC but I keep wanting to yell WHY DO YOU HATE USING PERIODS?

For me the biggest thing that irks me isn't one specific mistake (they're/there/their or loose/lose etc.) but repeated mistakes. I can overlook any typo done once or twice, though I'll usually still notice and cringe a little on the inside. What gets me is when people make the same mistake over and over. I tried reading gocurrycracker.com a few times and had to stop because they have a chronic issue with dropping periods from the last sentence in each paragraph. Once I noticed that it was all I could see and it drove me up the effing wall.

Oh, God, I thought that was just me. I can read GCC but I keep wanting to yell WHY DO YOU HATE USING PERIODS?

Annoying indeed. I think these are all part of the adult baby-talk fad mentioned earlier ("veggie" is the one that is my pet peeve). People apparently think that baby talk will make then sound winsome and charming, instead of childish and grating. I keep hoping that they will come to their senses and that soon it will all go away.

For me the biggest thing that irks me isn't one specific mistake (they're/there/their or loose/lose etc.) but repeated mistakes. I can overlook any typo done once or twice, though I'll usually still notice and cringe a little on the inside. What gets me is when people make the same mistake over and over. I tried reading gocurrycracker.com a few times and had to stop because they have a chronic issue with dropping periods from the last sentence in each paragraph. Once I noticed that it was all I could see and it drove me up the effing wall.

Oh, God, I thought that was just me. I can read GCC but I keep wanting to yell WHY DO YOU HATE USING PERIODS?

Yea that was really annoying. At least it only seemed to happen at the end of paragraphs (at least, the times I noticed) so it wasn't terrible, but still. What the hell?

At the Olympics competitors now 'medal' in an event instead of 'win a medal'. Argh!

I've never heard complaints about noun as verb stuff before. There are many words that are both nouns and verbs already (pipe, drive, slot, whip, start, end... the list goes on), why not add more if it makes the language succinct without loss of meaning?

At the Olympics competitors now 'medal' in an event instead of 'win a medal'. Argh!

I've never heard complaints about noun as verb stuff before. There are many words that are both nouns and verbs already (pipe, drive, slot, whip, start, end... the list goes on), why not add more if it makes the language succinct without loss of meaning?

Well, because every language has standards of usage, and in English, succinctness is not among them.

Formation of nouns from verbs has been going on for the entire history of the language. It's not a novel offensive concept. For example, the word "kidnapper" is the original form of the word, first found in the 1600s. The verb "to kidnap" was constructed as a verb version of the noun. Given the centuries-old history, it's hard to argue that construction of verbs from nouns is per se objectionable.

Oooohhh, and then there's the need to use many syllables to appear more intelligent.

Instead of car, say vehicle.

These words aren't synonyms. "Vehicle" describes any machine or device used for carrying something, and also has an even broader metaphorical use (e.g. IRA as a "savings vehicle"). If the speaker wants to focus on the nature of the device as something that transports people, "vehicle" may well be a better choice than "car", which brings to mind specifically one kind of vehicle. In writing and speaking, we're often forced to choose between words with similar meanings, and the choice of which to use is based on the expectations of the audience, the intent of the speaker, and other relevant factors. I agree with you that simpler language is generally preferably, but good writers don't follow rigid rules like "never use the word 'vehicle'", because that's silly.

Formation of nouns from verbs has been going on for the entire history of the language. It's not a novel offensive concept. For example, the word "kidnapper" is the original form of the word, first found in the 1600s. The verb "to kidnap" was constructed as a verb version of the noun. Given the centuries-old history, it's hard to argue that construction of verbs from nouns is per se objectionable.

Oooohhh, and then there's the need to use many syllables to appear more intelligent.

Instead of car, say vehicle.

These words aren't synonyms. "Vehicle" describes any machine or device used for carrying something, and also has an even broader metaphorical use (e.g. IRA as a "savings vehicle"). If the speaker wants to focus on the nature of the device as something that transports people, "vehicle" may well be a better choice than "car", which brings to mind specifically one kind of vehicle. In writing and speaking, we're often forced to choose between words with similar meanings, and the choice of which to use is based on the expectations of the audience, the intent of the speaker, and other relevant factors. I agree with you that simpler language is generally preferably, but good writers don't follow rigid rules like "never use the word 'vehicle'", because that's silly.

No, of course, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about people (and I know more than a few) who literally never say the word "car" to mean their car. They always, always, say vehicle. Because, I think, they feel it makes them sound more erudite.

Formation of nouns from verbs has been going on for the entire history of the language. It's not a novel offensive concept. For example, the word "kidnapper" is the original form of the word, first found in the 1600s. The verb "to kidnap" was constructed as a verb version of the noun. Given the centuries-old history, it's hard to argue that construction of verbs from nouns is per se objectionable.

Oooohhh, and then there's the need to use many syllables to appear more intelligent.

Instead of car, say vehicle.

These words aren't synonyms. "Vehicle" describes any machine or device used for carrying something, and also has an even broader metaphorical use (e.g. IRA as a "savings vehicle"). If the speaker wants to focus on the nature of the device as something that transports people, "vehicle" may well be a better choice than "car", which brings to mind specifically one kind of vehicle. In writing and speaking, we're often forced to choose between words with similar meanings, and the choice of which to use is based on the expectations of the audience, the intent of the speaker, and other relevant factors. I agree with you that simpler language is generally preferably, but good writers don't follow rigid rules like "never use the word 'vehicle'", because that's silly.

No, of course, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about people (and I know more than a few) who literally never say the word "car" to mean their car. They always, always, say vehicle. Because, I think, they feel it makes them sound more erudite.

What a bunch of cavemen. I prefer the term automobile. More syllables means more smarter.

Formation of nouns from verbs has been going on for the entire history of the language. It's not a novel offensive concept. For example, the word "kidnapper" is the original form of the word, first found in the 1600s. The verb "to kidnap" was constructed as a verb version of the noun. Given the centuries-old history, it's hard to argue that construction of verbs from nouns is per se objectionable.

And back-formation of verbs? How do those do historically? Because I don't like these and would like to kill off the words forever.Orientation --> Orientate. Really! This is apparently pretty common in some countries. I don't understand why orient wouldn't be the correct verb.Conversation --> Conversate (from a doctor, no less)Incentive --> Incentivize. Why can't we just say offer an incentive? this word has become pervasive.

Ici on parle Franglais. So many Anglophones (yes, that is a legitimate word, thank you, at least here, it goes with Francophone and Allophone) use the French verb form in English - it would make perfect sense in French, but sounds odd in English. Of course using similar words in the other language can cause issues - one government minister talked about rampant something, and got yelled at by the English media - in French 'rampant' means creeping, so the intended meaning was quite different.

Can we add cutely/folksy to the nail on blackboard screechers? Along with veggies?

I am reading an on-line discussion on raising rabbits for meat. Obviously when these are animals you are planning to eat, you are not going to call them bun-buns - but 'hoppers? Yes that is "'hoppers", I did not add the " ' ". It makes me think of grasshoppers. If someone knows enough about a topic to use correct terminology (bucks, does, kindling) this is downright cutesy, and off-putting. Gah.

Hi. Long thread here. I might have missed these so I'll beg the ol' pardon if I'm being redundant.

Along with the OP's "then" when people mean "than", I see a lot of "He should OF.." instead of "He should HAVE..."

Even the 6'oclock news guys, professional talkers, all too often will say "Eck-scape" instead of "escape".

And the never popular: These days most everyone uses a computer which conveys no real information unless you decode the incorrect meaningless words. They mean: These days almost everyone uses a computer, or possibly "These days most people use a computer.

These are not mere "Grammar Nazi" issues. Who vs whom. Or even their vs there. One is considered an over-refinement even by many English teachers today and never impacts the meaning anyway. The second could just be an on-the-fly typo or editing error. On informal internet forums nobody is writing for the ages. I can sway with the idiomatic or argot. But "should of" for "should have". "Eck-scape" (especially from a media communicator) , "most everyone" ... ?

These days most everyone uses a computer which conveys no real information unless you decode the incorrect meaningless words. They mean: These days almost everyone uses a computer, or possibly "These days most people use a computer.

This one doesn't bother me. It's been around for hundreds of years, and is definitely a reduced for of "almost". To me, it's in the same category as "don't" or "it's".

Ugh.. Don't get me started on 'don't' and 'it's'. Why can't everyone on the internet just write in perfect prose for all their conversations. Guys it's not that hard! I'm only expecting everyone to have the same education level as me. Remember all internet debates must include a thesis.

Hi Johnny. Where are you AT? AAAUUUGGGHHH!!! Stop. just stop after you. Where are you. That's the question. Washington DC news stinks because the anchors cannot even speak proper English! I hear the "where you at?" ALL. THE. TIME.